A prospective single-arm study on the efficacy and safety of short-course oral corticosteroids followed by topical corticosteroids in patients with severe chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Little evidence exists regarding an integrated multidimensional evaluation methodology to analyze the within-patient effects of medical treatment for chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP). We aimed to use an integrated evaluation model to analyze the effects of short-course oral corticosteroid (OCS) followed by intranasal corticosteroid spray (INCS) therapy in patients with severe CRSwNP. METHODS: In all, 32 patients with severe CRSwNP received oral methylprednisolone for three weeks followed by intranasal budesonide spray for nine weeks in this prospective single-arm study. An evaluation model integrating the concepts of the core outcome set (COS), clinical control and minimum clinically important difference (MCID) was longitudinally evaluated. RESULTS: All uncontrolled patients at baseline showed similar progressive improvements from baseline and more than 1 MCID response across core outcomes during the OCS period, with severe CRSwNP being partly controlled in 31 (96.9%) patients and uncontrolled in 1 (3.1%) patient at 3 weeks. During the subsequent INCS period, 14 (43.8%) patients gradually deteriorated to an uncontrolled status at 12 weeks, whereas 18 (56.2%) exhibited partly controlled CRSwNP until 12 weeks. CONCLUSIONS: In more than half of the patients, severe CRSwNP was partly controlled with the initial OCS followed by INCS therapy. An integrated evaluation model was used to facilitate the comprehensive evaluation of within-patient response, especially in patients with different responses to the same treatment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ChiCTR1900024287.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".